| 
By Nancy Frazier
O’Brien
Catholic News Service
WASHINGTON
(CNS) -- Nonprofit health care institutions do better in terms of both
costs and health outcomes than their for-profit counterparts, according
to an analysis of 162 previous studies published by Health Affairs, a
journal of health policy thought and research.
In the article, published online June 20, authors Mark Schlesinger and
Brad Gray said that “nonprofit health plans were significantly more
likely than for-profits to support safety-net providers and contribute
to community health initiatives that benefit the poor.”
Schlesinger, a professor of health policy at Yale University School of
Medicine, and Gray, a research associate at the Urban Institute in Washington,
also found that:
• For-profit institutions “more aggressively mark up prices
over costs and otherwise maximize revenue.”
• Nonprofits “appear more trustworthy in delivering services,
being less likely to make misleading claims, to have complaints lodged
against them by patients, and to treat vulnerable patients differently
from other clientele.”
• Nonprofits are “typically the incubators of innovation,”
being more likely to develop services “for which there is not yet
a market.”
• Nonprofits are “slower to react to change,” and thus
less likely to drop services or withdraw from markets when profit margins
decline.
Citing figures from 2002, the authors said for-profit companies operate
about 70 percent of the nursing homes, health maintenance organizations
and dialysis centers in the country, but only 16 percent of the acute-care
hospitals, 24 percent of the substance-abuse treatment facilities and
27 percent of the hospice programs.
The differences between nonprofit and for-profit health care institutions
have been under scrutiny in recent years as some members of Congress and
state legislators look into the benefits to society of tax exemptions
provided to nonprofit institutions.
Last year Sen. Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa, chairman of the Senate Finance
Committee, asked 10 of the nation’s largest nonprofit hospital systems,
including Resurrection Health Care in Chicago, to answer 46 detailed questions
on its charity care, patient billing practices, debt collection procedures
and other policies.
Grassley and others are considering introducing legislation that would
require nonprofit hospitals to provide charity care in an amount that
is equal to or higher than the amount the government fails to receive
because of the institution’s tax exemption. Similar proposals have
come up in several states.
But Schlesinger and Gray said such a top-down system of accountability
would not adequately reflect the needs of all communities. They proposed
instead that systems for judging the community benefit of hospitals be
drawn up and evaluated within each community.
“Greater nonprofit accountability is a valid policy goal, so long
as it does not lead to a narrowly defined specification of community benefit,”
they said.
The Catholic Health Association, during its recent meeting in Orlando,
Fla., released an updated guide to help Catholic health institutions assess
the benefits they provide to a community and share that information with
the community, including legislators.
“When Catholic health care and other not-for-profit health care
organizations began in this country, there was a clear understanding that
they provided community benefit,” CHA said in a summary of the document,
“A Guide for Planning and Reporting Community Benefit.”
“Today, however, the community service role of not-for-profit health
care is not well understood by policymakers and the public,” it
added. “As a result there is a growing need for not-for-profit health
care organizations to tell their community benefit story.”
CHA said community benefits include charity care, subsidies to insufficiently
funded government health programs for the poor, community health programs,
professional education, research, financial contributions and community-building
activities.
|
|
|